Background: You're helping us test out an early version of some new discussion software on Wikipedia, the world's largest free encyclopedia. Don't worry about messing anything up – this is just a prototype, not the real site! Mindset: You're reading about rivers on Wikipedia, and you decide to look at the discussion page to see what people have said about the topic. You have some ideas about how to improve this topic on Wikipedia and might want to jump into the discussion...

If you've scrolled down to read the page, go back up to the top and click on the "discussion" tab in the top left corner. (If you can't find it, follow this link). Talk through what you're seeing – what do you think this page is for?

Let's say you want to see an overview of all the discussion topics here. Without leaving this page, can you find a way to do that? (If you're still stuck after 2-3 minutes, it's okay – just move onto the next task.)

If you haven't found them already, try clicking the 3 small icons above the first discussion ("Introduction misleading") on the right-hand side. Pick a view that you like and browse the discussions on the page, talking through what you see. (Take 2-3 min)

Navigate to the discussion titled "Lake?" Let's say you have something to add to this discussion – just pretend you're an expert. Go ahead and try to participate in the discussion (again, don't worry about messing anything up!).

Now say you want to start a brand new discussion here. Can you find how to do that? Go ahead and try it if you do. Did this work like you expected? If you can't find how to do this in 1-2 minutes, you can skip the next task.

Pretend there's a typo in your new topic title – can you find how to edit it?

Have you ever looked at discussion (sometimes called "talk pages") on Wikipedia? If so, how does what you tested today compare to those pages?

Do you look at discussions or comments sections online on other sites? How does what you tested just now compare to that? Did it remind you of those other sites, or did it look very different?

Was there anything you found especially confusing or frustrating?

Would you be okay with us sharing this video with our editor community? We build features in partnership with them, and your experiences can help us and them see what we need to improve in our software.

28-yr-old female, "advanced" online experience, has looked at talk pages on Wikipedia but finds them too overwhelming/confusing to use

Test notes

When asked how she would get an overview of all the topics on this page, easily finds the 3 buttons that toggle the view of the board (chooses the middle view first, then goes to the small view).

In the smallest view, says she assumes that she can click on any topic to open it up and read the comments.

Super confused by the participant count in the smallest view. She thinks it's the number of responses, but when she investigates, she knows that's not right.

She also is confused by the "1 comment" string – not sure if it's a call to action to comment or metadata about the discussion.

Has no trouble finding the topic action menu to edit titles.

Likes the icons, says they're straightforward and let her know exactly what everything is for

Likes the way adding new topic works - works like everything else on the page.

Confused that she has IP address instead of username – wants a way to add her username to the post

Question answers

"I have looked at the discussion/talk pages. I feel as though this one seems a little more organized. I often check talk pages for more detail and to see what folks are discussing about the topic at hand, but I rarely reply because the pages tend to be overwhelming with the number of comments and responses, and I feel my own topic/comment would simply get lost in the shuffle as well. This was a lot easier to keep organized, simplified and the comment process was easy."

"I do look at discussion/comment sections on other sites. It is quite similar to what I see on blogging platforms, except that it's on a separate page rather than at the bottom of the post, or in this case, wiki article. The only real difference was the lack of ability to use your own name or handle, and no email address was required to respond (which actually made it easier)."

The topic participant number confused her the most.

Test video not available (This user declined to share his video, but notes from the test are included below)

49-yr-old male, "advanced" online experience, has looked at talk pages before and has done a little bit of Wikipedia editing "but not much"

Test notes

When asked how he would get an overview of all the topics on this page, says he wanted to see some kind of "collapse/expand all" functionality (heh), but he didn't see it right away.

He does very quickly find the 3 icons for doing that, but he claims they're pretty subtle and he wouldn't have found them if he wasn't looking for them.

Wanted to see a collapse/expand carat to the left of the topic title or a plaintext link that says "expand all/collapse all"

Not sure why there are 2 smaller views – he likes the middle the best and says he would use that one.

Confused by the fact that the comment numbers don't match between middle and smallest view.

Has no trouble clicking topics open/closed for the rest of the test.

Tries to double-click topic title to edit it. Has a lot of trouble finding the topic action menu icon, though he does eventually. He wants a pencil icon next to the tile.

He gets to a diff page by clicking on one of the last-modified pencil icons and gets very confused.

Question answers

Has seen talk pages before but doesn't recall what's different about this experience except the different viewing options.

This is a test of Wikipedia's user-to-user communication systems. In this scenario, you have recently joined Wikipedia and tried a few first edits. A few days have passed since your initial login and you are now returning to the site, curious if anyone has noticed or objected to your edits.

Remember, we're testing the interface, not you. If you're having difficulty with something, the problem is with our design. Please "think out loud" as much as possible; tell us your thought process during each task, and try to explain your general opinions as you arrive at them.

Log in using the account Silver waffles. Suppose this is the account you previously created.

See if you can find out if you have new messages regarding your prior edits, including to an article you recall being about redemption. Where would you expect this to be found?
Spend no more than a few minutes on this.

Now see if you can reply to the second message regarding the article you previously edited. Pretend you disagree with it and say so (you can use a reason if you want, but it's not required).

Suppose you're not sure Orchaen solns (the user who left the message) will know that you replied. Does there appear to be anything further you can/would need to do to make sure they get your response?
Try to do this in whatever way makes the most sense to you.

User wishes actual messages were called out; does not understand that "Welcome Template" is also a message (there's no distinctions)

User has difficulty figuring out how to reply to messages on their own talk page

User has extreme difficulty figuring out how to leave a new message for another user

User assumes that "watch this page" will send them a "read receipt". User wants to know that their message has been sent. She somehow ends up on page history trying to see if her message was sent, and is completely overwhelmed.

Test Video not available (This user declined permission to share the video, but takeaways are included below)

Successfully locates new messages.

Gets lost by the edit screen

Assumes welcome message and the revert warning as a single message.

User does not respond on her talk page; instead goes to the other user's talk page.

Tries to leave a message there; gets confused. Does not see a way to reply.

User expresses confusion about the difference between responding to a section and starting a new section

User starts new section in response to original message, does not include a summary. Upon save, this results in confusion (she cannot find the message she left). Assumes there must be a delay between saving and delivery.

User tries again, this time adding a subject (thinking that the missing subject may be why it didn't appear in the first place). She correctly inserts her signature. However, this is because she see charinsert tools (the whole editor does not fit on her screen).

User ultimately gives up in frustration (this is probably why she did not give permission to share the video).

This test was the same as the first except for a minor clarification in one of the tasks (referring to a specific edit to "Dwarf cat" over generically described "edits").

This test will also be run on enwp, using the usual assortment of templates and gadgets, so that testers would be able to interact with a full environment. Some accounts from the previous test were reused, and two new ones set up for the interaction, with talkpages and contributions populated for the test.

This is a test of Wikipedia's discussion system. In this scenario, you have recently joined Wikipedia and edited a few pages, including to the Dwarf cat article. Trying to add an image, however, you found the process too confusing and had to ask another user, Orcaen solns, for help. A few days have now passed since you last logged in, and by now you expect there will have been a response to your query.

Remember, we're testing the interface, not you. If you're having difficulty with something, the problem is with our design. Please "think out loud" as much as possible; tell us your thought process during each task, and try to explain your general opinions as you arrive at them.

Log in using the account 'Gleaming muffins' using the password '...'. This was the username you used to make your edits and ask for help.

See if you can find out if Orcaen solns, the user you went to for help, responded and answered your question. Where would you expect to find the response?
Can you find where you would have originally sent the message with the question? Note that in the scenario it has been a few days and you would not necessarily remember this anyway.
Spend no more than a few minutes on this task.

Find the section 'I want to upload a picture of my cat' at the bottom. What seems to be happening here?
Can you tell who all is involved in the discussion that started from your question? What is your impression of these users?

Assume Orcaen solns' advice was helpful. How would you go about thanking him? Try to do this as a response to his explanation.

Can you tell how the messages are threaded? Regardless of what you did in the previous step, consider how you would need to thread your own responses.
Keeping this in mind, see if you can also reply to Doranton's question about your cat, keeping threading intact - suppose its name really is Binky and say so.

Now suppose you want to be sure Doranton is informed of your reply. You may have seen a blue 'talkback' message on your own talkpage (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Gleaming_muffins) from when Orcaen solns replied to your initial message, and you would like to do the same for Doranton. How would you go about doing this, or finding out how to do it?
Try to go about this in whatever way makes sense to you.

A major issues is that this user does not understand that the talk page contains several converations

User encounters the phrase "talk page stalker"; thinks its funny, but uses that knowledge to understand why a third party would get involved (suboptimal, but interesting)

User expects a "reply" link in signatures but eventually clicks edit on the section after some confusion.

POW. User is completely confused by a giant block of wikitext. Has many minor hiccups with the editor.

"I don't know where to begin." Completely confused by colon indentation; assumes that you need to know web programming; thinks wikitext is HTML. Is afraid that she'll screw up the entire page if she types anything.

User attempts to use search box to find their messages; fails. Eventually finds new messages bar. Feels stupid for not seeing it earlier.

User is obviously confused by the talk page and how to use it. Ends up in several different locations (same user talk page twice, then a user page, then their own talk page, then back to the first user talk page). Discovers a flaw with user pages in general (no "leave a message" link by default).

"I don't know how to put a response in here."

User drops in and out of editing the section several times, confused by wikitext.

User gives up on responding to the messages. Is forced to move forward with the task.

User cannot find the question they are responding to within the wikitext block.

User realizes that they didn't get a signature on their response.

User cannot understand talkback templates at all and ends up on help pages trying to figure them out.

"At this point I'd pretty much give up on Wikipedia and I wouldn't bother."

User spends a great deal of time reading help pages about Talkback templates.

"I'm just kind of feeling like an idiot now."

User gives up. Declares that he would not waste his time trying to figure the system out.